职务行为的正当性之判断

职务行为对于实现国家职能、维护社会秩序而言是必不可少的,因此,很多国家将其规定为正当行为,认为其即使符合犯罪构成要件,也不一定构成犯罪。我国虽未明文规定排除职务行为的犯罪性,但在实践中,对于执行职务造成损害的,通常也不作为犯罪处理。据此,出于对私权利的保护和合理排除职务行为的犯罪性的需要,应当建立判断职务行为正当性的标准。     

依法行政与执政理念的转变

政府的管理活动主要是通过行政机关进行的,因而依法行政是依法治国的重要组成部分。中国加入WTO后,对行政机关提出更高的要求。为此,中国政府必须强化依法行政的观念,尽快实现执政理念的转变。     

论执政党行政道德

行政道德是国家机关公职人员必备的道德素质。在贯彻“以德治国”战略中,首先要使以“德”为基础的价值理性成为“治国”的一种基本精神,渗透于国家、社会各个层面。加强执政党行政道德建设,有利于避免行政道德失范和行政腐败的发生,对于实施以德行政,全面推进有中国特色社会主义现代化建设具有重要的意义。     

The Irreducible Core of the Duty of Care,Skill and Diligence of Company Directors: Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Healey

The decision in ASIC v Healey raises hitherto unexplored questions about the standard of care of non‐executive directors in monitoring the production of financial statements. More particularly, it considers the power of directors to delegate areas of responsibility requiring specialist knowledge and the degree of permissible reliance on professional advisers. The reasoning of the judge will doubtless prove helpful to the English courts not only in relation to duty of care issues under section 174 of the Companies Act 2006, but also when considering the duty to exercise independent judgment which is now restated in section 173.     

论目的主义的制定法解释方法——以美国法律过程学派的目的主义版本为中心的分析

目的主义在美国主要指法律过程学派的哈特和萨克斯所提出的制定法解释理论.该理论反对传统制定法解释中的意义论和意图论,强调目的在制定法解释中的优先地位及解释者对制定法目的的建构,要求以能最佳实现目的的方式来确定制定法文本的意义,并对解释施加文本规约意义和“清楚陈述的既定政策”的限制.目的主义的吸引力在于既赋予解释者更新、发展制定法的任务,以合作者的姿态参与公共政策的生产过程,又竭力避免非民选的司法机关作出争议性的价值判断和政策选择.     

论消费者的责任

近年来,西方一些国家的消费者政策发生了转换,消费者的知情权、消费者教育以及消费者的义务得以强化。国际社会还兴起了"消费者社会责任行动"。消费者责任实际上指的是消费者的义务,它分为消费者对自己的责任、对经营者的责任和对社会的责任三个方面。消费者保护法中应规定消费者的责任,但应仅限于消费者对自己和社会的责任,而不是对经营者的责任。作为消费者中的一个类别,金融消费者也应负相应的责任。     

Precontractual Duties of Disclosure: A Comparative and Economic Perspective

If during precontractual negotiations a person deliberately keeps quiet about facts which he knew or should have known were of particular importance to the other party that party may avoid the contract on the ground of deceit if, and only if, a duty of disclosure can be found to exist. What are the conditions that must be satisfied to assume the existence of such a duty of disclosure? The European legal systems merely offer vague formulas with little or no operational power. Can economic theory provide more precise criteria? The general principle should be that a negotiating party must proffer information in his possession which is material to the other party's decision. However, economic analysis suggests that a party should be allowed to withhold material information if the information is “productive” and was costly to obtain unless its acquisition and disclosure were owed under a contract for value. These rules are discussed in the light of a number of cases from various European jurisdictions.     

We All Make Mistakes: A ‘Duty of Virtue’ Theory of Restitutionary Liability for Mistaken Payments

In contrast to the moral foundations of contract, tort, and the law of property, which are generally regarded as elements of Kantian ‘right’, the liability to return the value of mistaken payments is, it is argued, an example of the law's enforcing a duty of virtue, the legalisation of the duty of beneficence in a way similar (though not identical) to how the law might instantiate a duty of easy rescue. Accordingly, one of Birks's most cherished theses – that the law of unjust enrichment represents a distinctive element of private law – can be made out: it is distinctive in having an entirely different normative source: in virtue, not in right. But this result comes at a cost: (1) a legal system could function more or less justly without such a liability; (2) Birks's thesis that liability for mistaken payment is the archetype or paradigmatic case of liability for unjust enrichment would have to be abandoned; and (3) we would have to recognise that the ground of this liability is policy‐motivated.     

A Survey: Children’s Rights Post Termination of Parental Rights and Pre-Adoption

This survey of the statutory provisions and case law of all 50 states and the District of Columbia includes the rights of children to parental support, inheritance, and familial association remaining upon termination of parental rights. A majority of states terminate all the child’s rights at the time parental rights are severed. However, a number of states by explicit statutes or statutory construction have determined that a child’s rights to parental support survives termination of parental rights. This survey examines the prevailing law in each state and suggests statutory reforms to protect the legal status and rights of children.     

On the permissibility of shaping children’s values

Abstract

According to Harry Brighouse and Adam Swift, parents have a limited and conditional moral right to deliberately shape their children’s values and interests in light of their own particular comprehensive convictions. Their view contrasts with Matthew Clayton’s account of legitimate childrearing, according to which it is always impermissible for parents to seek to pass on their particular convictions to their children or, more generally, to ‘enroll’ them into their conception of the good, since this violates a requirement of respect for children’s independence. This paper offers a novel defense of Brighouse and Swift’s position that at least some forms of comprehensive enrollment are permissible. First, I argue that the claim that there is a duty to respect the independence of very young children is problematic. Then, drawing on Brighouse and Swift’s account of familial relationship goods, I argue that seeking to pass on comprehensive values or beliefs to one’s children is actually compatible with proper respect for their independence, as Clayton understands it.